So now FOUR senators are stopping the Combating Autism Bill, and they're doing it to benefit their contributors.

I spoke this morning with a representative from "Senator" Jim DeMint's office and asked why they were holding up S. 1094, the Combating Autism Reauthorization Act.

The person on the phone told me that DeMint did not oppose funding autism research but (this is the party line by now) wanted to avoid wasteful duplication and fraud.

When I asked what fraud, DeMint's staffer brought up the Danish scientist he said had been "convicted" of stealing money to build a house. I provided him the facts (took $1 million out of $11 million, had only been indicted, not convicted) and asked "Isn't that the case?" The staffer said "I don't know all the facts."

I asked for other examples of fraud, and was directed to a GAO report you can find here. That report was issued March 1, 2011, and is titled

Opportunities to Reduce Potential Duplication in Government Programs, Save Tax Dollars, and Enhance Revenue.

I didn't read all 345 pages (I suspect neither did the four Senators we'll get to) but I did do this: I searched for "autism" "autistic" "combating" "asperger's" and "Combating Autism".

No hits. Those words aren't mentioned in that document.

I searched for "NIH" and "National Institutes of Health." There were no mentions of those, other than a reference to a different GAO report related to NIH leasing practices.

I searched for "CDC."

Nothing.

"Centers for Disease Control" reached one source -- another related GAO report about the CDC's "Biosense" project.

Further questions from DeMint were not answered; I was told to leave a name and number and that I would get a call back from the health staffer. (At 8:00 a.m. CDST this morning, 9/21/11.)

I then found this letter signed by "Dr" Coburn, DeMint, Mike Lee, and Wisconsin's own current embarrassment-in-office, Ron "Sunspots Cause Global Warming" Johnson, who married his way into a company and slimed his way into office last year.

The letter repeats the party line in opposing this bill and vowing to not let it go to a vote -- there's fraud, the Danish researcher again along with a link to a story that cannot be found which they claim showed $350,000 in autism-intended funds being stolen by a couple in New Jersey. I wasn't able to find that story anywhere, even after I did a google search for "$350,000 new jersey autism center luxury cruises" and "couple fired autism center new jersey".

So have people been convicted of fraud in autism research? Taking the Senators at their word (remember, "Dr" Coburn is an artiste and may not be entirely truthful) there have been $1,350,000 in embezzled funds.

That's out of $1,048,000,000 -- or 0.1% of the total appropriations being embezzled.

So what, I wonder, is the amount of embezzlement and fraud in other government spending?

The most recent report available estimated that one-half -- 50% -- of all government credit card spending is on improper items including xBoxes and internet dating services. That's fifty thousand times as much fraud as there is in autism research.

Taxpayers are spending $40,000 per month -- per month -- to provide an office for former House speaker, and Republican, Dennis Hastert to work as a lobbyist. Not just an office -- but employees and a leased SUV.

There's no autistic kids getting leased SUVs, so far as I know, "Senators."

Over 1/2 of all farm subsidies go to commercial farms earning more than $200,000 per year -- according to that same report.

The FCC spent $350,000 -- the same number as in that I-can't-find-it New Jersey story, -- to sponsor a NASCAR racer.

I could go on. But I won't. There may be fraud - at a rate of 0.1% -- in autism research, but there's fraud in all government spending, and the numbers suggest that the autism research fraud is at a lower rate than any other government program anywhere.

More on the "Senators" opposition (sunspots don't cause autism, Ron Johnson!): The letter quotes Dr. Elias Zerhouni, former head of the NIH, as saying "disease-specific research" is not the best idea.

That's the same Dr. Elias Zerhouni who was under attack by conservatives in 2004 for researching human sexuality. That's also the same Zerhouni who lobbied for greater control over the NIH budget back in 2007 (when the Combating Autism funding was in its infancy), much to the consternation of patient groups and researchers. Zerhouni's argument back then was that having 27 different research centers was like having "27 fingers and no palm," and thought the NIH director (which he was at the time) should have greater discretion in distributing funds.

Back in 2007.

The NIH director is a presidential appointee -- it may be that "Dr" Coburn et al are hoping for a GOP president next year and an NIH director who will be more amenable to their control, the way the GOP is trying to keep the economy slow to dampen Obama's re-election hopes -- and Zerhouni was appointed in 2002 by Worst President Ever. And in fact, Congress in 2006 did what Zerhouni asked them to do -- he got his bill authorizing greater NIH director control over research.

So Zerhouni emphatically was not talking about the Combating Autism act, or any current funding requests, when he asked back in 2007 (and before) for greater control over funding research (and got it.)

So, what is it that DeMint and "Dr" Coburn and Ron The Embarrassment and The Other Guy are hoping to achieve by blocking this bill? Who are they really working for?

For that, we should look at OpenSecrets.org, which tracks campaign contributions. In 2012, "Dr" Coburn's top contributors are (in order) the "Club For Growth," which opposes any federal spending, "Emergent Biosolutions," primarily a defense contractor, which got two NIH grants back in 2006, another one in 2010, and, in fact, going back to 2005, has received $37,258,196 in funds from the NIH.

So "Dr" Coburn's top 2012 contributer makes an average of $6,000,000 per year off NIH grants alone... and "Dr" Coburn wants to give greater latitude to the head of the NIH to award grants. Coincidence?

I didn't need look any further for "Dr" Coburn. But I will also note that a top contributor of his is Abbott Laboratories, which produces a drug that may cause autism; in 2004, NIH was requested by members of Congress to do a "march-in" of Abbott Labs.

"Dr" Coburn, DeMint, and Ron Johnson also all got large contributions from "Koch Industries." There's that name again -- and how are they connected to the NIH?

David Koch used to be on the NIH board, that's how. He left the NIH board in September, 2010 -- just before the NIH classified formaldehyde as a cancer causing agent. Koch's company Georgia Pacific is a leading producer of formaldehyde in the U.S., and ProPublica accused two (other) Republican senators of delaying the results of NIH investigations.

Since leaving, Koch has not only bankrolled anti-NIH senators, but has started his own center for cancer research at MIT... which boasts on its own site that it receives "major funding" from the NIH.

So there you have it: Three of the major contributors to the four senators stand to benefit from greater latitude in funding the NIH, and those four senators are demanding that autism funds be given to the NIH with essentially no controls.

What does that sound like to you?